Re: Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium
From: Geoff Lane (zzassgl@twirl.mcc.ac.uk)Date: 06/26/02
- Next message: srt@nospam.unt.edu: "Re: Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium"
- Previous message: Nick Maclaren: "Re: subjective Q. - what's the most secure OS?"
- In reply to: blunted1: "Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium"
- Next in thread: srt@nospam.unt.edu: "Re: Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium"
- Reply: srt@nospam.unt.edu: "Re: Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Geoff Lane <zzassgl@twirl.mcc.ac.uk> Date: 26 Jun 2002 10:37:02 GMT
blunted1 <dank@neverschwag.com> wrote:
> Securing content via hardware, will it work? I think not.
> I just wanted to get the *NIX spin on Microsoft's latest way to control the
> desktop. Will the open source community follow with an equal?
It wont work because a program has no idea if it's running on h/w or s/w.
Everything a program may check can be faked. We don't do full emulation
much today because it's slow but with the Crusoe CPU you can fake any CPU ID
you like just by writing a bit of firmware/assembler to emulate all the x86
ID instructions.
-- /\ Geoff. Lane. /\ Manchester Computing /\ Manchester /\ M13 9PL /\ England /\The only thing God didn't do to Job was give him a computer.
- Next message: srt@nospam.unt.edu: "Re: Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium"
- Previous message: Nick Maclaren: "Re: subjective Q. - what's the most secure OS?"
- In reply to: blunted1: "Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium"
- Next in thread: srt@nospam.unt.edu: "Re: Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium"
- Reply: srt@nospam.unt.edu: "Re: Microsoft's Jihad - Palladium"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
